list_folders

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided. Description simply says 'List folders' implying a read operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it's destructive, rate limits, authentication needs, or response structure details beyond 'hierarchy with IDs and names'. The agent gets minimal safety cues.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with front-loaded verb and result. No redundant words; every part carries meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Tool is simple (1 param, no output schema), so description is minimally adequate. However, it omits details like whether folder listing is recursive, pagination, or error handling. Could be more complete given no annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter description 'Note code to list folders from'. The description adds no new parameter information beyond what the schema already conveys. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the verb 'list' and resource 'folders' with scope 'in a NotePM note'. It specifies output: 'folder hierarchy with IDs and names'. Among sibling tools (create_page, get_page, etc.), none are for listing folders, so it's well-distinguished.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Description implies usage when you need folder hierarchy for a note, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use, prerequisites (e.g., note_code validity), or alternatives. No exclusions or context for tool selection provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.